Commonwealth v. Crawford
17 A.3d 1279
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Crawford was convicted by jury of two second-degree murders, two counts of aggravated assault, arson, risking a catastrophe, and two counts of criminal trespass; he received two consecutive life terms for the murders, two consecutive 5–10 year terms for aggravated assault, and a concurrent 3.5–7 year term for risking a catastrophe.
- Represented by private counsel at trial, Crawford pursued a direct appeal to the Superior Court, which affirmed his judgment of sentence on September 7, 2005; no allowance of appeal was filed.
- Crawford filed a pro se PCRA petition on November 14, 2005; counsel was appointed and an amended petition was filed May 15, 2006; he was allowed to seek allowance of appeal nunc pro tunc to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which denied relief on November 30, 2006.
- Crawford filed a pro se PCRA petition on October 9, 2007; counsel filed a Finley letter indicating no merit and no viable issues for a counseled amended petition; the court dismissed the petition on May 13, 2009, and counsel was permitted to withdraw.
- Crawford filed a June 10, 2009 notice of appeal with the PCRA court; the court later accepted the notice as timely, but the court and this Court held the filing was improper because the notice was not mailed to the Clerk of Quarter Sessions; the mailbox rule does not cure improper filing to the wrong office.
- Under the Rule 902/903/905 framework, the notice of appeal must be filed with the clerk of the lower court; depositing a document in a judge's chambers does not constitute filing; this Court deemed the appeal untimely and quashed it.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of appeal after PCRA dismissal | Crawford timely under the prisoner mailbox rule | Notice was not properly mailed to the Clerk of Quarter Sessions | Appeal untimely; quashed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Nahavandian, 954 A.2d 625 (Pa.Super.2008) (jurisdiction triggered by timely notice; mailbox rule limits; improper filing may affect timeliness)
- Commonwealth v. Patterson, 931 A.2d 710 (Pa.Super.2007) (mailbox rule applies to filing date for pro se documents in prison)
- Commonwealth v. Tedesco, 379 Pa.Super. 567, 550 A.2d 796 (Pa.Super.1988) (depositing in a judge's chambers is not filing; clerk of courts must receive notice)